Welcome Guest
[Log In]
[Register]
| Welcome to Unto The Breach. Join us! http://s6.zetaboards.com/Unto_The_Breach/register/ If you are already a member log in below |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Consequentialism versus; Nonconsequentialism in theology. | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 6 2004, 09:34 AM (414 Views) | |
| colo_crawdad | Dec 7 2004, 11:04 AM Post #36 |
Knight of the Realm
|
Either the "disparity of views" is about what you say or it is about individuals who want to call themselves Christians, or Muslims or any other host of religions that have not historically proscribed homosexuality, while re-writing the rules to suit themselves. I simply remind folks of the words of the Catholic theology student which I posted a few days ago on another thread. There has also been a good deal of evidence presented her and on the earlier Fire as well as the AtC that suggests that Christian proscription of homosexuality is a rather recent occurrence. |
![]() |
|
| Richard | Dec 7 2004, 11:04 AM Post #37 |
Sir Galahad, Lord of the Realm
|
If you truly believe, then that belief is manifest in your actions and attitudes. I must think that any Christian who claims that homosexuality is not a sin is also not a true believer. As an atheist who is searching, I have examined a number of denominations and I find all of them to be lacking. Churches are formed of people and this is to be expected, but some denominations are so liberal and accepting of the secular world that they lack any significant commitment to God. They are more social clubs then Churches and there is a strong correlation between leftest thinking and the mutability of church doctrine. Other denomination are very serious but the message appears to have been significantly distorted to grant power to the clergy within the denomination. I have developed what I call the "fish" test. I simply ask the Preacher to explain to me Jonah being swallowed up by a great fish for three days. If the pastor takes the story literally then I must think that the church is committed to the scripture but if he starts talking about how parts of the Bible are metaphorical, then I must think the church to be rather liberal and suspect. The question of homosexual sin is another good test but is far more controversial as it brings into play very strongly held positions that are secular instead of religious in nature. I have never met a preacher that thought Jonah was literally swallowed by a fish that did not think homosexuality to be a sin. I like churches where you can smell Jonah's fish in the honest belief of the membership. Best Regards, Richard |
![]() |
|
| colo_crawdad | Dec 7 2004, 11:11 AM Post #38 |
Knight of the Realm
|
But Richard, As a self-proclaimed atheist, you refuse to belong to one. Am I correct? |
![]() |
|
| Richard | Dec 7 2004, 11:23 AM Post #39 |
Sir Galahad, Lord of the Realm
|
Lowell, I am not a member of any church as that would be hypocritical even if some leftist churches might grant me a membership. My wife is a Methodist and I attend her church frequently even tho I find methodist to be rather wishy washy. The number of people in that Church who know I am an atheist is very limited because I consider myself to be a guest and largely keep my mouth shut. This forum might be an appropriate place to discuss issues but I do not put myself forward in a church out of respect for those members who are attending to share in Christian fellowship. The Pastor failed the "fish" test. I must admit that I wish my wife would choose a more conservative Church but I love her anyway. Best Regards, Richard |
![]() |
|
| Ouachita Flash | Dec 7 2004, 11:43 AM Post #40 |
Manly Guard of the Realm
|
Richard, sometimes you bring tears to my eyes when you talk about my Lord, how oh how can you not be a Christian? I know you probably hear that a lot. I believe He's using you whether you can admit Him or not. God Bless You sir. |
![]() |
|
| abradf2519 | Dec 7 2004, 11:48 AM Post #41 |
Duke of Dilbert
|
Richard.... I like your "fish" test. There are lots of Pastors that would pass this test including my own. The church says "Baptist" on the sign but he calls himself a "Biblisist". I won't go to a church that doesn't use hermanutics to interpret the Bible. |
![]() |
|
| PIAN0buff | Dec 7 2004, 11:49 AM Post #42 |
Wandering Minstrel
|
Richard is really a reformed Presbyterian - he just doesn't know it yet.
|
![]() |
|
| OzarkPreacher | Dec 7 2004, 12:49 PM Post #43 |
Sir Lancelot
|
He strikes me more as a practicing Pentecostal. |
![]() |
|
| Richard | Dec 7 2004, 03:59 PM Post #44 |
Sir Galahad, Lord of the Realm
|
I have visited a Pentecostal church once and one of Susi's aunts is Pentecostal but I was not very comfortable in the service which was rather charismatic in nature. It was certainly an energetic congregation. I have never attended a Reformed Presbyterian church and I do not think there is one in the Dallas area but it might indeed be a good environment for me. I have attended a Baptist church and I liked them quite a bit. I like the autonomous nature of each Baptist congregation but I think this might have been taken somewhat to excess. The benefit is that the church does not develop a worldly "superstructure" of bureaucrats but this also seams to engender some measure of isolation from the broader community. I would rather my wife was Baptist then Methodist although I suspect that her church runs to the liberal end of the Methodist spectrum. It seams to me that a denomination, over time, slowly departs from scripture. This is an incremental process, not dissimilar to the way the Supreme Court has slowly departed from the original meaning of the Constitution, until there are glaring discrepancies between the actions of the Church and the word of God. This generates a significant tension between those who desire reformation, a return to a Biblical foundation, and traditionalist who find comfort or power in the institutional aspects of the church. These events can be cataclysmic like the Greek schism or the Protestant reformation which divides a church in half or they can be developmental where a new congregation is formed and grows over time. I must think that the process of reform is critically important, a renewal of purpose, a return to the source. I think that the best Church is most likely one that has been recently invigorated by reformation but is not immature or overly simplistic in it's views about God and Jesus Christ. Best Regards, Richard |
![]() |
|
| OzarkPreacher | Dec 7 2004, 05:27 PM Post #45 |
Sir Lancelot
|
Richard, you seem to have very good grasp of what takes place in most denominational settings. I have ministered and visited in all of them at one time or another and I would not take anything away from any. All jhave something good to offer and any church which is built on sound biblical doctrine, meaning the inerrant Word of God, then I have no problem with whatever they choose to call themselves. My motto for denomination is "I don't care who's name is on the sign as long as Jesus is inside". |
![]() |
|
| PIAN0buff | Dec 7 2004, 07:46 PM Post #46 |
Wandering Minstrel
|
Richard, I believe there is a wonderful theologian (possibly a pastor) in the Dallas area named Sinclair Ferguson. I have read one of his books. I think he has an excellent grasp of the scriptures. If you get a chance to hear him speak I would highly recommend it. I'd be willing to bet that he'd pass the "fish" test. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() Our users say it best: "Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used." |
|
| « Previous Topic · Ye Olde Unto the Breach · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic | 1:31 PM Jul 11 |
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy







